Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
mik
Oct 16, 2003
oh
Those 25GB plans are hilarious.

If you have cbc.ca/news as your homepage watch out! It auto-refreshes every 10 minutes, and the page is about 1.5mb. That's 5GB a month if left to continuously refresh; 20% of your monthly allowance.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

orange lime
Jul 24, 2008

by Fistgrrl
How about this statistic, from the very first comment on the CBC page?

$2 for one gigabyte of data
- or -
$2 for 13 text messages (2.03kB if all the characters are used)

"tell me they aren't just pulling these numbers out of their rear end."

All goes over the same pipes from the same providers.

[e] I wonder if it's even possible to calculate how little a single text message (160 bytes) costs to send, when the telcos charge you 15 cents each? One thing at a time though.

orange lime fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Jan 31, 2011

priznat
Jul 7, 2009

Let's get drunk and kiss each other all night.
I re-read that Vancouver sun commentary again just to make myself mad.

The fact that in some people's minds bandwidth is similar to shipping a package across the country is pretty amazing.

All I've learned for certain is that people are terrible at analogies.

Viktor
Nov 12, 2005

So looks like the liberals have weighed in, guess emailing my Liberal MP helped out :)

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2011/01/31/technology-internet-usage-based-billing-clement-garneau.html posted:

"We consider this decision to be anti-competitive, because it does penalize the small internet service providers," said Marc Garneau, Liberal technology critic and MP for Westmount-Ville Marie, Monday.

"We hope that the current government will review the CRTC decision and reverse it."

some kinda jackal
Feb 25, 2003

 
 

ZShakespeare posted:

Rather than spending $5 for an extra GB of internet I could get a

Five

Five Dolla

Five Dolla Footloooooooooong

Someone needs to spoof the campaign:

Five

Five dolla

Five dollar per giiiiig (that's like one netflix movie)

some kinda jackal
Feb 25, 2003

 
 
edit: Doublepost

less than three
Aug 9, 2007



Fallen Rib
So I'm downloading the digital purchase of The Sims 3 (and expansions.)

23.6 GB. (If I was on Bell I'd be screwed.)

I opened up WireShark to see where it was coming from?

Shaw hosted CDN.

Of course they don't differentiate between local and transit traffic, so they're adding 24GB to my meter even though the content is hosted locally. :argh:

orange lime
Jul 24, 2008

by Fistgrrl

Viktor posted:

So looks like the liberals have weighed in, guess emailing my Liberal MP helped out :)

Marc Garneau is so dreamy :swoon:

8ender
Sep 24, 2003

clown is watching you sleep

Viktor posted:

So looks like the liberals have weighed in, guess emailing my Liberal MP helped out :)

This may actually do more harm than good. If the conservatives were thinking of beating up on another federal agency in public (and they sure don't like the CRTC) then they might change their mind if it means looking like they're agreeing with the Libs.

Sputnik
Jul 21, 2003

I felt like a ninja, and my kung-fu was strong.

I know it's already been mentioned over the last 19 pages, but it's infuriating ridiculous that Bell and Big Business can organize how an entire country accesses the internet. I know that OpenMedia (and yeah, I know it's already been linked) is trying to do its part, but I can't help but feel that having to rely on an internet petition to voice rage at Bell is like pissing into the wind.


edit: Additionally, this latest Rage Against The Machine at Bell (seemingly a weekly event in the Sputnik household) taught me that CTV is now owned by Bell! Fantastic impartial news reporting, no doubt!

Viktor
Nov 12, 2005

less than three posted:

Shaw hosted CDN.

Of course they don't differentiate between local and transit traffic, so they're adding 24GB to my meter even though the content is hosted locally. :argh:

This is what ticks me off about this whole metering is that blame for huge bandwidth consumption such as Netflix is all CDN based that has to be fanned out to most ISP's. If a major ISP in this day and age isn't hosting a bunch of CDN's on their local network for say Microsoft updates(Akamai) they are absolutely insane.

some kinda jackal
Feb 25, 2003

 
 

less than three posted:

Of course they don't differentiate between local and transit traffic, so they're adding 24GB to my meter even though the content is hosted locally. :argh:

It's a shame about the UBB because without the burden of having to pay ridiculous fees for overages I would say that this is exactly how it should work in a neutral internet -- same price no matter where you get your content.

Er -- I'm not trying to make any point other than without the context of the UBB that would actually be a good thing :3:

(then again without UBB you wouldn't have brought it up so -- )

less than three
Aug 9, 2007



Fallen Rib

Martytoof posted:

It's a shame about the UBB because without the burden of having to pay ridiculous fees for overages I would say that this is exactly how it should work in a neutral internet -- same price no matter where you get your content.

Er -- I'm not trying to make any point other than without the context of the UBB that would actually be a good thing :3:

(then again without UBB you wouldn't have brought it up so -- )

I agree with you. Delivery should be location neutral. However if they want to start charging based on usage, it's bullshit to count data they're not actually having to pull from the Internet.

Or in Bell's case, putting the meter before the DPI hardware, so that any retransmitted packets due to Bell's throttling count double towards your usage.

some kinda jackal
Feb 25, 2003

 
 

less than three posted:

I agree with you. Delivery should be location neutral. However if they want to start charging based on usage, it's bullshit to count data they're not actually having to pull from the Internet.

Yeah I almost felt bad replying because it's obvious what the intent of your post was and I didn't want to muddy the water with philosophy.

orange lime
Jul 24, 2008

by Fistgrrl
The logical conclusion of adjusting fees based on whether it's the company's server or not is a sliding scale of prices based on how far the data has to travel. Which makes even less loving sense than UBB.

Not to mention network neutrality's worst nightmare. Christ.

Acer Pilot
Feb 17, 2007
put the 'the' in therapist

:dukedog:

orange lime posted:

How about this statistic, from the very first comment on the CBC page?

$2 for one gigabyte of data
- or -
$2 for 13 text messages (2.03kB if all the characters are used)

"tell me they aren't just pulling these numbers out of their rear end."

All goes over the same pipes from the same providers.

[e] I wonder if it's even possible to calculate how little a single text message (160 bytes) costs to send, when the telcos charge you 15 cents each? One thing at a time though.

$0.20 each text message if you're on Rogers/Fido :colbert:

edit:

Reverse internet billing decision, Liberals say!!

Acer Pilot fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Feb 1, 2011

Kreez
Oct 18, 2003

Tony Clement is my MP, I just sent him a short email from my business (one he knows personally) address. Probably only a 1% chance someone actually reads it, but whatever.

Piquai Souban
Mar 21, 2007

Manque du respect: toujours.
Triple bas cinq: toujours.

Bonzo posted:

I've had the residential Dry DSL for about two years. I would assume you just use the their form to change services or call them up and pay the switching fee.

If it's that easy I'll just do this.

Let me know how that goes!

Shumagorath
Jun 6, 2001
I was so happy when I read this you have no idea. The CBC is also the only major news site covering this due to the massive conflict of interest elsewhere, and now they're finally reporting the issue of the telcos owning TV and networks too.

Something for Rogers customers:
1) Go here: http://www.rogers.com/web/content/contactus
2) Click "Make a complaint" and select "Office of the President"
3) Fill in whatever for the manager's name (I used the name of certain PR scum from Bell)
4) Tell them about all the services you will pull if they announce UBB.

I told them that our family would pull four phones and two cable installations, which is about 10× what they would make off UBB during my average month.

8ender posted:

This may actually do more harm than good. If the conservatives were thinking of beating up on another federal agency in public (and they sure don't like the CRTC) then they might change their mind if it means looking like they're agreeing with the Libs.
With an election looming and the Tories desperate for votes in Ontario/Quebec where all the poo poo is going down, I doubt they want to be known as the party that washed their hands of everyone getting hosed on their internet bills.

Shumagorath fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Feb 1, 2011

dark_panda
Oct 25, 2004
I think the CRTC's website is either getting slammed right now or it's getting a proper DDOS or something, 'cause I can't get through to get some information I need for the letters I'm writing. Yay internet?

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/ for details I guess?

The Dark One
Aug 19, 2005

I'm your friend and I'm not going to just stand by and let you do this!
AEI just updated their prices. For Quebec, starting in March, their standard $30/5Mbps service will have a 60GB cap, with each extra gig costing $2.50, to a maximum of $60 extra. That is, unless you blow past 300GB, when they'll start charging $2.00 per gig, with no limit.

They also now have $40, $50 and $60 plans that have 100, 140 and 180 gig caps that have the same overage fees as the base rate.

HorusTheAvenger
Nov 7, 2005

ToxicFrog posted:

Welp. Just got an email from TekSavvy; starting in March my internet access goes from unmetered to 25GB/mo (with additional bandwidth available at $5/mo per 40GB). And I'm out in the K-W area, so I'm outside TekSavvy cable coverage.

At least dryloop is much cheaper now than it was when I signed up; I could ditch my analog phone service (which I never use), switch to dryloop, drop $5/mo to upgrade to 65GB service and still come out ahead. 65GB is a bit cramped but I can manage with that.

gently caress the CRTC and gently caress Bell, twice, with a rusty 40-port switch.

I have been similarly waiting for TekSavvy cable. However, a friend sent me this link:
http://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/fc1so/yak_communications_is_rolling_out_10mbps_dsl_in/

Apparently Yak owns their own lines in K-W. Dirt cheap for a 10meg unlimited DSL too. I need to get on the phone with these people. Why didn't I know of them sooner?

Dudebro
Jan 1, 2010
I :fap: TO UNDERAGE GYMNASTS
I wish I could get Yak. Right now, their broadband is available in some parts of Toronto and other places in Ontario that you don't really want to live in.

Shumagorath
Jun 6, 2001
Is there any chance Yak's line to my house would be able to do 10/.8 if Teksavvy could only manage 4/.5? Just hedging my bets here.

HorusTheAvenger
Nov 7, 2005

Shumagorath posted:

Is there any chance Yak's line to my house would be able to do 10/.8 if Teksavvy could only manage 4/.5? Just hedging my bets here.

Probably not. I was just reading up on it. Yak's just co-locating their own DSLAMs in Bell's COs. Which is acronym goo for they plug their DSL equipment on to your Bell line. Bell still charges you (well, Yak who then charges you) to fix the phone line. It's all Yak DSL equipment though and thus Bell can't and doesn't need to charge UBB fees.

Edit: s/fix things/fix the phone line/

Nairbo
Jan 2, 2005
Funny how this is destroying apathy in the tech-savvy groups. Most of my friends from work who couldn't possibly have cared less about politics are now eyeing a vote for the Liberals or NDP solely based on this, including one who is a staunch Conservative voter and is not changing his position based on this issue alone.

It'll be interesting to see what happens, and the conflicts of interest in this mess are too many to count. The CRTC being run by ex Bell corporations, usage based billing edging Netflix out from companies who provide both ISPs and the very service that Netflix competes with, and now news organizations not reporting on the issue because they're owned either by Shaw or by Bell Media.

I typically hate the CBC for the CRTC circle jerk they continually put on in their editorials but I guess you can't ignore independent news sites for too long when they're getting 160 thousand signatures.

8ender
Sep 24, 2003

clown is watching you sleep

Godinster posted:

Funny how this is destroying apathy in the tech-savvy groups. Most of my friends from work who couldn't possibly have cared less about politics are now eyeing a vote for the Liberals or NDP solely based on this, including one who is a staunch Conservative voter and is not changing his position based on this issue alone.

The thing that bothers me is that even if the CRTC ruling is overturned it really can't stop there or this will just keep coming back to haunt us. Really important basic infrastructure used by everyone in the country is locked up by a handful of megacorps right now, and they don't want to compete.

Unless the ruling governmental party grows some balls and takes that infrastructure back, rolling it into a regulated non-profit wholesaler or something like that, then the current infrastructure owners will just continue to try out new and exciting ways of crippling their wholesale clients. They're so vertically integrated now that you really can't fault them for it; It makes the most business sense for them to do everything they can to ensure that customers are using all of the pieces from their stack rather than substituting in any of their competitors services.

fishmech
Jul 16, 2006

by VideoGames
Salad Prong
Ok serious question here - how much of the Canadian broadband subscriber base is taken by the top carrier? Just for reference, Comcast is the top provider with 15.9 million subscriber households out of 80 million us household with broadband - 19.88%

less than three
Aug 9, 2007



Fallen Rib

fishmech posted:

Ok serious question here - how much of the Canadian broadband subscriber base is taken by the top carrier? Just for reference, Comcast is the top provider with 15.9 million subscriber households out of 80 million us household with broadband - 19.88%
I couldn't find anything more recent.

Nomenklatura
Dec 4, 2002

If Canada is to survive, it can only survive in mutual respect and in love for one another.

Viktor posted:

So looks like the liberals have weighed in, guess emailing my Liberal MP helped out :)
NDP thinks it's bullshit on rye, Tories are making the same noises that they did over Wind, and now the grits are calling it "anti-competitive".

If this doesn't get reversed, it'll be proof that Bell doesn't just have friends in the PMO, it has incriminating photos of people in the PMO.

Shumagorath posted:

Something for Rogers customers:
1) Go here: http://www.rogers.com/web/content/contactus
2) Click "Make a complaint" and select "Office of the President"
3) Fill in whatever for the manager's name (I used the name of certain PR scum from Bell)
4) Tell them about all the services you will pull if they announce UBB.
Uh, Rogers HAS UBB. I just went over my (too loving low) cap today thanks to the Winter Steam Sale. This is about ISPs that uses Rogers' "last mile" cable network, and they are pretty much not Rogers internet customers by definition.

(Maybe if you're a big TV watcher? Tell them you're cancelling playboy and all the other ripoff adult stations or something, that'd get their attention.)

Edit: Okay, that Yak thing is confusing. People are saying that they have their own DSLAMs and whatnot, but the actual Yak *site* says they're moving to UBB in March. Doesn't say anything about exceptions at all.

Nomenklatura fucked around with this message at 08:04 on Feb 1, 2011

Nomenklatura
Dec 4, 2002

If Canada is to survive, it can only survive in mutual respect and in love for one another.

8ender posted:

The thing that bothers me is that even if the CRTC ruling is overturned it really can't stop there or this will just keep coming back to haunt us. Really important basic infrastructure used by everyone in the country is locked up by a handful of megacorps right now, and they don't want to compete.

Unless the ruling governmental party grows some balls and takes that infrastructure back, rolling it into a regulated non-profit wholesaler or something like that, then the current infrastructure owners will just continue to try out new and exciting ways of crippling their wholesale clients. They're so vertically integrated now that you really can't fault them for it; It makes the most business sense for them to do everything they can to ensure that customers are using all of the pieces from their stack rather than substituting in any of their competitors services.
My wild-assed guess is that the Government will set some sort of limit for UBB charges for third parties, going way beyond the 15% discount we're seeing now. There's probably going to be a lot of hard questions about that "pay a cent, charge five bucks" thing.

The best thing might be if they focus on results, rather than method. Set a minimum standard for congestion and require the ISP itself to sort out how they go about solving it. Since UBB has NOTHING to do with congestion—that's why it's a scam—the small ISPs would have a lot of latitude to use traffic shaping or differentiated pricing or poo poo like that to ensure that congestion is minimal.

(Or, they WOULD, if congestion were actually an issue at all. Since it ISN'T—that's the other scam—TekSavvy et al could basically do whatever the gently caress they please.)

Edit: That nationalization thing would be good too, but there's not a chance in hell that the Tories would do it. A Lib/NDP coalition might. If that's what you want, then figure out which party is mostly likely to beat a Tory near where you are, and start helping out. Generally that's NDP west of Manitoba barring Vancouver, Liberal in Ontario and much of the East, and who the hell knows in Quebec since they've got like seven parties there now or something.

Nomenklatura fucked around with this message at 08:13 on Feb 1, 2011

Nomenklatura
Dec 4, 2002

If Canada is to survive, it can only survive in mutual respect and in love for one another.
From that CBC thing:

quote:

I am a Canadian living in the Philippines, I can make a call to Canada for less than 5 cents a minute, my internet with unlimited download is $20.00 a month. This is a 3rd world country, like most countries here in Asia, and they have the best and fastest internet compared to Canada and its cheap. Yes, the wages here are very low, so how do we compare??? The hardware costs almost the same here as it does in Canada. If they charged the same rates as in Canada the whole system would collapse in a matter of days as no body could afford it.
Obviously there is no competition in Canada. You people are getting SCREWED!!!
People in third world countries make fun of our cell phone plans, too.

cka
May 3, 2004

Nomenklatura posted:

Edit: Okay, that Yak thing is confusing. People are saying that they have their own DSLAMs and whatnot, but the actual Yak *site* says they're moving to UBB in March. Doesn't say anything about exceptions at all.


If it's anything like what I heard from a friend of mine that works at the ISP I'm on, they have their own DSLAM equipment set up but can only provide access to it for people that live within a certain radius of the CO. For example, there's about a 4 or 5 kilometer radius in my city where my ISP's DSL comes in via their own DSLAM setup, but areas outside of that are still on Bell's equipment because they won't let them run their equipment in remote-ish locations like that. According to them, I have "nothing to worry about" regarding the UBB change coming in March.

My ISP has a page outlining the changes coming with UBB (without any clear explanations of areas that aren't affected, probably to not piss everybody off that IS affected), but when I plug my account information into their bandwidth tracker it says it's not a valid DSL account and UBB doesn't apply, so v:shobon:v

Arsten
Feb 18, 2003

orange lime posted:

[e] I wonder if it's even possible to calculate how little a single text message (160 bytes) costs to send, when the telcos charge you 15 cents each? One thing at a time though.

The 160 byte SMS messages are free for the carrier. They are sent to your phone during it's normal update against the cell towers in an area of dataspace that was previously assigned for expansion.

You are literally paying them for the right to do almost nothing.

PeePot
Dec 1, 2002


I saw a blip on CTV last night. Even a nerdy looking Cyber Cafe owner was quoted as saying this will only affect bandwidth hogs. It's odd seeing it so blatantly skewed.

Sashimi
Dec 26, 2008


College Slice
For anyone interested in seeing how Canadian internet stacks up to the rest of the world, this is a highly informative site. It doesn't look good when its only us and Australia that are the only countries that don't offer any sort of unlimited internet.... in 2009.

kuddles
Jul 16, 2006

Like a fist wrapped in blood...

Martytoof posted:

It's a shame about the UBB because without the burden of having to pay ridiculous fees for overages I would say that this is exactly how it should work in a neutral internet -- same price no matter where you get your content.

The fact that the telcos have been able to frame this discussion as "UBB" is the worst thing about this situation since that it not what is being implemented. People who don't understand the issue just hear "usage based billing instead of unlimited internet" and it does sound like a bunch of greedy torrenters expecting a free ride. Hell, that's probably what I would feel about it myself if I didn't know the details.

The fact that a lot of the vocal commentators in these stories are these "information should be free" fucknuts who are just supporting this strawman position isn't helping either, though.

8ender
Sep 24, 2003

clown is watching you sleep
Sneakernet is back:
http://blog.indiecred.net/post/3048520519/the-price-of-data-in-canada

Nairbo
Jan 2, 2005

That SSD comparison is a pretty good indication of how overpriced $2 a gig is.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

univbee
Jun 3, 2004




^^ I'm seriously tempted to start offering this as a service (with traditional drives instead, of course).

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply